Editorial Standards Findings Appeals to the Trust and other editorial issues considered by the Editorial Standards Committee June 2012 issued July 2012 Getting the best out of the BBC for licence fee payers Editorial Standards Findings/Appeals to the Trust and other editorial issues considered Contentsby the Editorial Standards Committee Remit of the Editorial Standards Committee 1 Summary of findings 3 Appeal Findings 7 The Rise and Lies of Tommy Sheridan, 23 December 2010, and Reporting Scotland, 26 January 2011 7 BBC News At Six and BBC News At Ten, 9 December 2011 27 Newsnight, BBC Two, 13 September 2011 33 Application of Expedited Procedure at Stage 3 41 Rejected Appeals 45 Remembrance Sunday: The Cenotaph, BBC One, 13 November 2011 45 Family Guy, BBC Three, 17 December 2011 48 ―Credit rating warning: George Osborne v Ed Balls‖, BBC News Website, February 2012 52 BBC World Class trails, BBC News Channel 55 The Boys Who Killed Stephen Lawrence, BBC One, 26 July 2006 (Complaint made out of time) 61 Application of expedited complaint handling procedure at Stage 1 64 Today, BBC Radio 4, 1 October 2011 67 BBC Scotland News and discussion programmes 76 Frozen Planet, BBC One, 23 November 2011 80 Sunday, BBC Radio 4, 13 November 2011 84 News at Six, BBC One and BBC News Channel, 8 December 2011 88 The Film Programme, BBC Radio 4, 15 December 2011 91 Wales Today, BBC Wales, 12 March 2009 95 News at Ten, BBC One, 14 December 2011 101 Newspaper article by Jeremy Paxman, 31 October 2011 105 Panorama: What‘s Fuelling Your Energy Bill?, BBC One, 7 November 2011 111 PM, Radio 4, 19 January 2012 117 The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 Ten Years On, BBC Two, 29 August 2011 120 9/11: Conspiracy Road Trip, BBC Three, 8 September 2011 149 June 2012 issued July 2012 Remit of the Editorial Standards Committee The Editorial Standards Committee (ESC) is responsible for assisting the Trust in securing editorial standards. It has a number of responsibilities, set out in its Terms of Reference at bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/about/meetings_and_minutes/bbc_trust_committees.html. The Committee comprises five Trustees: Alison Hastings (Chairman), Mehmuda Mian, David Liddiment, Richard Ayre and Lord Williams. It is advised and supported by the Trust Unit. In line with the ESC‘s responsibility for monitoring the effectiveness of handling editorial complaints by BBC management, the Committee considers appeals against the decisions and actions of the BBC‘s Editorial Complaints Unit (ECU) or of a BBC Director with responsibility for the BBC‘s output (if the editorial complaint falls outside the remit of the ECU). The Committee may consider appeals concerning complaints which allege that: the complainant has suffered unfair treatment in a transmitted programme, item or piece of online content, or in the process of making the programme, item or online content the complainant‘s privacy has been unjustifiably infringed, either in a transmitted programme or item, or in the process of making the programme or item or online content there has otherwise been a failure to observe required editorial standards However, not all requests for appeal qualify for consideration by the ESC. The Editorial Complaints and Appeals procedure1 explains that: 5.10 The Trust will only consider an appeal if it raises “a matter of substance”.2 This will ordinarily mean that in the opinion of the Trust there is a reasonable prospect that the appeal will be upheld as amounting to a breach of the Editorial Guidelines. In deciding whether an appeal raises a matter of substance, the Trust may consider (in fairness to the interests of all licence fee payers in general) whether it is appropriate, proportionate and cost-effective to consider the appeal.3 The Trust may not consider an appeal that is trivial, misconceived, hypothetical, repetitious or otherwise vexatious. The Trust may also decline to consider an appeal which includes gratuitously abusive or offensive language if the complainant refuses to reword it after being invited to do so. 1 http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/regulatory_framework/protocols/2012/complaints_fr_work_ed_complai nts.pdf 2 Under the Charter and Agreement, the Trust has a role as final arbiter in appropriate cases, and must provide a right of appeal in cases that raise a matter of substance. 3 For example, if an appeal raises a relatively minor issue that would be complicated, time-consuming or expensive to resolve, the Trust may decide that the appeal does not raise a matter of substance, and decline to consider it. June 2012 issued July 2012 1 In deciding whether an appeal qualifies for consideration, the Committee may also decide to take only part of the appeal, and consider only some of the issues raised. Where an appeal or part of an appeal qualifies for consideration, the Committee will aim to provide the complainant with its final decision within 80 working days of accepting the request for an appeal. The findings for all appeals accepted by the Committee are reported in this bulletin, Editorial Standards Findings: Appeals to the Trust and other issues considered by the Editorial Standards Committee. Where it is considered that an appeal does not qualify for consideration, the Trust Unit will write to the complainant within 40 working days of receipt of the request for an appeal, declining to put the matter before the Committee and explaining the reasons. If the complainant disagrees with this view then they may, within 10 working days, ask the Editorial Standards Committee to review the decision, and the matter will be reviewed at the next available meeting of the Committee. The Committee will then decide whether it agrees with the decision not to proceed with the appeal, and again will aim to provide the complainant with its decision within 80 working days of receipt of the request for review. Any appeals that the Committee has declined to consider under the above criteria are reported in the bulletin under the heading Rejected Appeals. If the Committee disagrees with the decision not to proceed with the appeal, the complainant will be informed following the meeting and the appeal will be considered, following investigation, at a later meeting. In this case the 80 working day time period will start again from the date the Committee informs the complainant it will hear the appeal. Achievement against these target response times is reported in the BBC‘s Annual Report and Accounts: http://www.bbc.co.uk/annualreport/ In line with its duty to consider topics of editorial concern to the Committee, whether or not such concern arises from a formal complaint, and to commission information requests from the Trust Unit or Executive to support such consideration, the Committee also from time to time requests the Executive to report to the Committee regarding breaches which have been accepted by the Executive and are therefore not subject to appeal to the Committee. The bulletin also may contain findings relating to such cases. The bulletin also includes any remedial action/s directed by the Committee. It is published at bbc.co.uk/bbctrust and is available from: The Secretary, Editorial Standards Committee BBC Trust Unit 180 Great Portland Street London W1W 5QZ June 2012 issued July 2012 2 Summary of findings The Rise and Lies of Tommy Sheridan, 23 December 2010, and Reporting Scotland, 26 January 2011 This appeal was considered at the May 2012 meeting of the Editorial Standards Committee. The complainant originally alleged that two BBC Scotland programmes, The Rise and Lies of Tommy Sheridan, and Reporting Scotland breached the BBC‘s Editorial Guidelines on Accuracy, Impartiality, and Privacy and Fairness. The complainant also questioned the legality of the way police interview footage had been obtained. At its meeting of 1 December 2011, the Committee had decided not to consider the part of the appeal relating to the legality of the way in which the police interview footage was obtained, on the basis that it was being investigated by the Procurator Fiscal. The Committee had also noted that it does not hear third party complaints relating to privacy and fairness and, as the complainant was not acting as an agent for Mr and Mrs Sheridan, this part of the appeal would not form part of its consideration. Therefore the remaining issues before the Committee related only to Accuracy and Impartiality. The Committee concluded: The Rise and Lies of Tommy Sheridan that the use of footage of Mrs Sheridan‘s police interview was duly accurate and did not mislead the audience. that the programme makers had exercised due accuracy in relation to the disguising of the identity of the police officer and the witness. that there were editorial reasons for showing the footage of the police interviews and its use had not breached the Impartiality Guidelines. Reporting Scotland that the reversal of, and inclusion of, footage of two extracts from a police interview with Mr Sheridan was not misleading and not a breach of the Accuracy Guidelines. that the programme was duly impartial as a whole and that there was no evidence to support the view that the programme-maker was biased. that it was inescapable that Mr Sheridan had been convicted of perjury, and the tone and language of the presenter simply conveyed this fact, rather than presenting any personal prejudices. that the programme was not in breach of the Impartiality Guidelines. Supplementary points that, on the basis of the conclusions it had reached in relation to these two programmes, and only considering the allegation within the context of these two programmes, there was no evidence before the Committee that there was any substance to the complainant‘s allegations regarding the integrity of BBC journalists more generally.